What is the test for establishing probable cause in a criminal case?

established guidelines for determining the existence of probable cause: 'Our decisions applying the totality-of-the-circumstances analysis ... have consistently recognized the value of corroboration of details of an informant's tip by independent police work .... [Reliance] on hearsay "is not to be deemed insufficient on that score, so long as a substantial basis for crediting the hearsay is presented.' [Citation.] The court explained that the factors set out in its prior casesi.e., 'an informant's "veracity," "reliability," and "basis of knowledge" 'are 'all highly relevant' factors that, together or separately, 'usefully illuminate the commonsense, practical question whether there is "probable cause" to believe that contraband or evidence is located in a particular place.' The court further explained that 'a deficiency in one [of these factors] may be compensated for, in determining the overall reliability of a tip, by a strong showing as to the other, or by some other indicia of reliability.' " (People v. Camarella (1991) 54 Cal.3d 592, 600-601.)

" 'Because unverified information from an untested or unreliable informant is ordinarily unreliable, it does not establish probable cause unless it is "corroborated in essential respects by other facts, sources or circumstances." [Citations.] For corroboration to be adequate, it must pertain to the alleged criminal activity; ... [T]he corroboration is sufficient if police investigation has uncovered probative indications of criminal activity along the lines suggested by the informant.' " (People v. Gotfried (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 254, 263-264.)